The Framing Analysis Essay Example

his idea and tried to define framing or frame, such as Antenna (1993), as cited in his work: "Framing essentially involves selection and salience. To frame is to select some aspects of perceived reality and make them more salient in the communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation and/or treatment recommendation for the item described (p. 51). " According to him, framing analysis explains the influence of information on audience's consciousness through text, such as speech, news report, novel or symbol.

The salience of information could be increased by placement or repetition or associating them with culturally familiar symbols (Antenna, 1993). Framing is a critical activity because it helps us to construct the reality. Barman and Davis (2009) stated several strengths of frame analysis. First, it focused on individual in mass communication process. Secondly, the concept of framing is applicable to macro-level effects studies. Lastly, it is highly flexible and open-ended, in terms of definition and premises. However, framing has been criticized by the other researchers.

Antenna (1993) hardhearted framing as a "fractured" paradigm that lacks clear conceptual definitions and a comprehensive statement to apply in research (Holland, 2009). According to him, there is no consistency on frame' or framing definitions. Thus, there should be single paradigm to explain the definitions of framing. As Barman and Davis (2009) said that the flexible and open-ended of framing, it is also one of the weaknesses because the lack of specificity. On the other hand, Tangelo (2002) argued that there should not be a single framing theory.

The framing theories should be accumulated and encourage researchers to employ

and refine the process of framing. Reese (2007) support Tangelo argumentation, said that framing is more a research program that a unified paradigm. According to him, the diversity of framing definition is beneficial to develop the understanding its process. Framing has an important implication on political communication. Politicians can frame their influence through news that Journalists write, which can make different feedback and view from audience (Antenna, 1993). Media uses political symbols or words to construct the meaning of a certain political power.

Moreover, media revised the space or time to the political figures or events. The more they have time and space, the more they gain publics attentions (Sober, 2004). Two concepts of framing that need to be specified are media frames and audience frames (Scuffle, 1999). Media frames defined as "a central organizing idea or story line that provides meaning to an unfolding strip or events. The media frame suggests what controversy is about and the essence of issue" (Samson and Mandolins, 1987, cited in Scuffle, 2000, p. 36). Media or news frame is Journalists' routine, when they can identify and classify the information.

Audience frames in the other hand, defined as "mentally stored clusters of ideas that guide individuals' processing of information (Antenna, 1993, p. 53). Application on Research Framing is one of concepts that broadly used in mass communication researches. Frame analysis essentially examines the selection and salience of certain aspects of an issue by exploring images, stereotypes, metaphors, actors, and messages (Matches, 2009). It gained interest from researchers since Saffron's work and the studies mostly focused on Journalism and how news influence audience's views of social world.

Some researches that

also have an important role in field are done by Gave Dutchmen (1978) and Todd Sitting (1980). Sitting focused on news coverage of politically radical group, especially in asses. The study shows that the media representation tended to lower their action and ignore their ideas. While Dustman's work focused on routine news production and news coverage of events. The study shows that news and events framed in ways to reinforce socially accepted and expected in a social world. The two studies imply that there is no objectivity in representing news and events in media content (Barman and Davis, 2009).

The major premise of framing theory is that an issue can be viewed from a variety of perspectives and be construed as having implications for multiple values or considerations. Framing refers to the process by which people develop a particular conceptualization of an issue or reorient their thinking about an issue (Chon and Drunkard, 2007, p. 104). In other words, events and news in media are looked in different ways, based on the framework that Journalists used. This confirms what Coffman said "the type of framework we employ provides a way of describing the event to which it is applied" (p. , in Scuffle, 2000, p. 301). As stated earlier, framing studies usually focused Journalism, how media represent certain issue. In applying the concept, researchers usually collect the data from print media or different forms, then use qualitative and quantitative content analysis techniques. For example, study done by Masses, Lee and Kim (2006) examined 442 stories from eight newspapers from Sir Lankan, Indonesia, and the Philippines and by one news agency from Pakistan. The study aims

to understand Asian news coverage of the Iraq War. Using content analysis, the findings show shows the variation of representation.

Besides, this study found that religion and sourcing are two important in shaping the framing the issue. Apart from that, framing often uses with agenda setting and priming in media effect researches. Scuffle (2000) said that these three concepts are theoretically different even though can be used at one time. According to him, agenda setting and priming linked to the attitude accessibility. Mass media has the power to increase the level of salience of certain issue and determined which consideration if individuals have to make Judgments about political figures. In other words, media have standards to make the content of media.

In contrast, framing is based on assumption that subtle change will occur on how audience think about an issue, not by invoking the salience of it, but by wording used by Journalists in representing certain issue. Effects of framing have been studied by many researchers yet there is still no agreement about the best measurement of them. In fact, frames in media affect the attitudes and behaviors of audiences. In communication frames, politicians often adopt frames by other politicians, media or citizens. On the other hand, media imitate frames used by politicians, sometimes social activists, or other media and tizzies.

As the result, citizens adopt frames that they learn and discuss them with other citizens. The attention in the political science and communications literatures, however, has been on how frames in the communications of elites (e. G. , politicians, media outlets, interest groups) influence citizens' frames and attitudes. This process is typically called a

framing effect (Chon and Drunkard, 2007, p. 109). Chon and Drunkard (2007) suggest that people draw opinions from set of beliefs stored in their memories, only some of them become accessible at a given moment.

According to them, framing effects depend on mixed factors including the strength and repetition of the frame, competitive environment and individual motivations. In conclusion, the concept of framing consistently gives a way to explain the power of communicating text (Antenna, 1993). Besides, there have been kinds of research done based on framing and I think it will be more varied in the future. As Coffman said, that social life is a constantly evolving and changing (Barman and Davis, 2009), as well as how media represent the phenomenon and how people look at it.